• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

Reader mode
Nah, enough with the people saying this just PS4 level. This will beat the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X.

  • The CPU is miles better than stupid 8 Jaguar cores.
  • The GPU is based on bloody 2020 tech not some old ass 2013 tech.
  • DLSS and Tensor cores will it far surpass the Xbox One X in terms of GPU prowess.
  • What else oh I know? Ray tracing will be so good that it make the Series S feel like its last gen.

Lastly, if the rumours of running UE5 demo is true?
THEN ITS NOT A PS4 LEVEL IS IT????
Running in 1080 60fps does not mean PS4 level, the Switch 2 exceeds the capabilies of any Gen 8 console.

Last time I checked the PS4/PS4 Pro cannot run UE5 Demo. Switch 2 is more like a mini PS5 and it is 100% part of the Ps5 generation thanks to latest tech and every game that was released on PS5 will run on Switch 2.
 
I enjoy the juxtaposition of back-to-back pessimism and sheer hype.

This will be the year.
 
omniryu said:
Nintendo always surpass the previous generation in ram. Why start now?
Click to expand...
because nintendo

gL88KkE.jpg
 
darthdiablo said:
If it's not "all over the place", curious, does anyone know what kind of monetary agreement are "standard" for Nintendo giving out new IP games to 3rd parties (such as some examples OldPuck listed.. Fire Emblem: Warriors, Mario + Rabbids, Link's Awakening, Cadence of Hyrule, Metroid Dread, Age of Calamity, Pikmin 4)

Like what % of revenues go to 3rd party, what % goes to Nintendo, etc?

I know there are probably intangible benefits (3rd party name getting more attention, leading to more potential future projects, etc).
Click to expand...
i dont consider unusual, Nintendo asking Wayfoward or any third-party to help them on a Nintendo IP, Nintendo do this since the Game Cube(point to Star Fox/F-Zero) that was developed by a Sega studio/Namco,
 
While I think Nintendo will go with 12gb, the biggest benefit from 16gb would be not from current gen ports, but from when the Series X2 and PS6 launch and those systems have 32gb+. I think the next Switch will have a much better chance of getting those ports and having them run well with 16gb of ram than it will with 12gb, so I'm crossing my fingers and hoping.

Also, for those who think Nintendo will do something dumb to cripple their machine, remember that there is a lot of new blood at Nintendo now and I don't think we can so easily predict what choices they will make. I'm hopeful that the new regime will develop a very well balanced and capable machine.
 
0
Giancarlo said:
i dont consider unusual, Nintendo asking Wayfoward or any third-party to help them on a Nintendo IP, Nintendo do this since the Game Cube(point to Star Fox/F-Zero) that was developed by a Sega studio/Namco,
Click to expand...
not 100% sure but I think you might have replied to the wrong comment?

The comment you replied to was purely about what kind of monetary agreement setups are standard. Not about whether it was unusual or not
 
0
NineTailSage said:
It was this information from the Linux submission that confirms it must be A78C cores.

Tue, Sep 20, 2022 at 04:36:46PM +0530, Sumit Gupta wrote:
> Adding support for Tegra239 SoC which has eight cores in
> a single cluster. Also, moving num_clusters to SoC data
Click to expand...
There are plenty of Arm CPUs that have an octa-core cluster configuration, but in terms of power efficiency (so no A710), support for legacy architectures (so no A715 or A720), and size (so no X1C or X2), A78C is still the best CPU core design for Switch 2.
 
ExoticSpice said:
Nah, enough with the people saying this just PS4 level. This will beat the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X.

  • The CPU is miles better than stupid 8 Jaguar cores.
  • The GPU is based on bloody 2020 tech not some old ass 2013 tech.
  • DLSS and Tensor cores will it far surpass the Xbox One X in terms of GPU prowess.
  • What else oh I know? Ray tracing will be so good that it make the Series S feel like its last gen.

Lastly, if the rumours of running UE5 demo is true?
THEN ITS NOT A PS4 LEVEL IS IT????
Running in 1080 60fps does not mean PS4 level, the Switch 2 exceeds the capabilies of any Gen 8 console.

Last time I checked the PS4/PS4 Pro cannot run UE5 Demo. Switch 2 is more like a mini PS5 and it is 100% part of the Ps5 generation thanks to latest tech and every game that was released on PS5 will run on Switch 2.
Click to expand...
So the Switch 2 is to PS5 what the Series S is to the Series X?
 
After reading the latest posts about the DLSS cost on DF's test (specially that older one from Thraktor that I missed), I feel a bit more optimistic.

I'm very curious about what Paul_Subsonic will be able to bring to the table with his tests (I hope he can make it work)
 
redmutineer75 said:
There are plenty of Arm CPUs that have an octa-core cluster configuration, but in terms of power efficiency (so no A710), support for legacy architectures (so no A715 or A720), and size (so no X1C or X2), A78C is still the best CPU core design for Switch 2.
Click to expand...

At the time of this chips inception, what could Nvidia had chosen to give an octa-core design in a single cluster and still support 32-bit compatibility?
 
0
in a weird way, despite phones' theoretical performance, they're kinda performing how I would expect switch games to perform, sans memory capacity and cpu, of course. RE4 being 300p is some shit I'd expect from a switch port. goes to show you how limiting the throttled power consumption is

redmutineer75 said:
There are plenty of Arm CPUs that have an octa-core cluster configuration, but in terms of power efficiency (so no A710), support for legacy architectures (so no A715 or A720), and size (so no X1C or X2), A78C is still the best CPU core design for Switch 2.
Click to expand...
a homogeneous octo-core design? not too many. and they're not in the customer space.
 
Samuspet said:
16gb would be a HUGE win over 12 in terms of porting current gen games. 2 extra gb for games is massive when downporting if we’re thinking the other 2 would be for the OS.
Click to expand...

Samuspet said:
Yes 4 extra versus 12 and as I said let’s say 2 is used for the OS.

Yes Series S is the baseline but developers HATE it with a passion. You want to deliver above that in terms of RAM especially when releasing 4 years after Series S.
Click to expand...
What is Nintendo going to do with 14GB for games on Switch 2.. That's more RAM for games on Switch 2 than X Series X and PS5 (13-13.5GB). We're talking about a console that is 3-4x weaker than the competition in GPU and bandwidth amount. DLSS could only do much. I don't expect a lot of 4k upscaled games to take advantage of 4k textures on the level of current gen, let alone current gen ports on Switch 2. DLSS isn't free and Switch 2 will have less cores than the 3x series.


If the Switch gets 12GB of RAM, and 2-3 for the OS, it would be ahead of X series S in that regard. That's the only home console it's really bring compared to ad competing with. If the Series S had 12GB of RAM, I bet that extra 2GB of RAM would have alleviated a lot of problems for it.

FishyFish said:
I'm gonna bet on 8GB for the simple reason that Nintendo almost always does something annoying to cripple their hardware.
Click to expand...
Out of all the hardware parts, RAM is something they don't skimp on. They have always given more vs previous gen competitor consoles that are around the same power ball park.

So yes, I think 12GB is probable based on that pattern as well as current trends with mobile. 16GB might actually be more probable than 8GB, if not equal. Also to note that Switch 2 will be more powerful than PS4 base (up to 2x) on the GPU, so 8GB wouldn't be great for that reason.

ziggyrivers said:
So the Switch 2 is to PS5 what the Series S is to the Series X?
Click to expand...
ExoticSpice said:
Pretty much but unlike the Series S, the switch 2 will have Nintendo games as well.
Click to expand...
It's not. X series S will demolish Switch 2 in CPU speed 2-3x. If will also have 2x as much bandwidth as Switch 2.

Switch 2 having more RAM and DLSS isn't going to have going toe to toe with X series S in most situations. Only when it's not bottlenecked by bandwidth and CPU. Which will become less and less as the years go by and developers try to squeze out PS5 and X.
 
ILikeFeet said:
because nintendo

gL88KkE.jpg
Click to expand...
I got a hot new leak in from our favorite leaker, ColdBoyPics96:

The new Nintendo successor console is going to be called '8GB' and will be advertised with the tagline 'Because Nintendo' featuring promotional videos of two smartly dressed Japanese businessmen going door to door looking confused.

The only game available on launch will be a remake of WaveRace 64 called 'WaveRace 8GB'
 
ziggyrivers said:
So the Switch 2 is to PS5 what the Series S is to the Series X?
Click to expand...
You know, that's not a bad comparison.

But the kicker, really, is that NG Switch is to PS5 as Xbox Series S is to Xbox Series S makes sense...

On raw computational power alone (in TV Mode)

Before DLSS or superior RT is accounted for.

And that's assuming that NG Switch is about 3TF flat. Some, including Necro, think it could go to or above 4TF.

Of raw performance, in TV mode.

Which would make it closer to PS5 than Xbox Series S is to Xbox Series X.

Look, the real world always changes things, but what would appear to be our worst case scenario, 3TF in TV mode with 12GB of RAM and slow DLSS, really is about as close to PS5 as Xbox Series S is to Xbox Series S.

But the best case scenario is... I hardly even want to say it. 4TF, 16GB of RAM, fast enough DLSS for 4K60? That wouldn't compare to PS5... It would smoke it. Which is why it's absurd to think about! In a scenario where PS5 targets 4K raw and a theoretical 4TF NG Switch targets 4K after DLSS, it's the NG Switch that has more power to spare, and that's absolutely bonkers.

Reality doesn't like bonkers. The reality is plenty of PS5 titles already use and will continue to use upscalers, and as internal resolutions drop, it'll get harder and harder to manifest a clean image out of NG Switch without serious cutbacks. There is a limit to how far you can stretch a game down the performance ladder before it buckles.

But that still leaves the vast majority of games on the table for NG Switch.

I won't say it's a handheld PS5. I won't say it could visually exceed it, aside from raytracing. But it will compare well, I think, and impress because of it.
 
LordNinjaFish said:
I'm taking the controversial stance of Switch 2 having no RAM.

@me h8ers
Click to expand...

You don't need RAM when you're the GOAT.

ExoticSpice said:
Nah, enough with the people saying this just PS4 level. This will beat the PS4 Pro and the Xbox One X.

  • The CPU is miles better than stupid 8 Jaguar cores.
  • The GPU is based on bloody 2020 tech not some old ass 2013 tech.
  • DLSS and Tensor cores will it far surpass the Xbox One X in terms of GPU prowess.
  • What else oh I know? Ray tracing will be so good that it make the Series S feel like its last gen.

Lastly, if the rumours of running UE5 demo is true?
THEN ITS NOT A PS4 LEVEL IS IT????
Running in 1080 60fps does not mean PS4 level, the Switch 2 exceeds the capabilies of any Gen 8 console.

Last time I checked the PS4/PS4 Pro cannot run UE5 Demo. Switch 2 is more like a mini PS5 and it is 100% part of the Ps5 generation thanks to latest tech and every game that was released on PS5 will run on Switch 2.
Click to expand...

Don't go getting your expectations too high. When people say "PS4-level" they mean the raw shader rendering power of the chip in handheld mode, we all know that things like the CPU, advanced GPU architecture, RT cores, DLSS, etc will push it further than that. But even the docked mode isn't likely to blow away an Xbox One X. Yes, it will be able to do certain things like ray-tracing and UE5 games that the One X couldn't run, but it will also very likely have less than a third of the RAM bandwidth. That might be partially mitigated by multi-tile rendering (not sure if the One X had that), and being about to target 4K with DLSS instead of native resolution will help, but DLSS has its own costs that we're still not fully able to figure out.

The people who think this thing will max out at PS4-level in docked mode are wrong and need to get off the doomer train, but the hype train has its own dangers.
 
darthdiablo said:
I have always thought it was exactly that, T239 basically is T234 design but with unnecessary (automotive/robotics related) elements removed. The Eurogamer article used similar language (T239 is T234 with elements cut out basically)
Click to expand...
It's not a huge distinction, and I'll admit I'm probably hung up on it just because I've been staring at the data forever. But Drake (T239) is a totally separate design from Orin (T234). They're very similar, but almost every component in T239 is different from it's T234 counterpart.

The CPU is a slightly different variant, in a different cluster configuration (8 cores in 1 cluster, instead of 3 clusters of 4 core each), with a larger L2 cache. This is a slight optimization for workloads with a medium number of threads and a lot of locking - exactly what you'd expect in a video game engine.

The GPU is 1 large GPC instead of 2 medium sized ones. Orin's design resembles the laptop offerings, Drake's design looks like the desktop GPUs.

The memory controller includes updates from Lovelace, that make it more power efficient. There is also evidence it's been updated to support the newer, faster memory standard.

More UPHY lanes have been given to DisplayPort, in order to support 4k HDR. The File Decompression Engine has been added (and likely integrated with the SSD controller).

The whole chip is full of micro-optimizations, and tiny little features that make it work better as a gaming device, even when it is the change is surprisingly intrusive. For example, the CPU difference is minor in its performance impact, but major in terms of work - you can't break up CPU clusters on-chip, so finding room for a cluster of 8 can be harder than finding room for 3 clusters of 4.

There isn't any fat left over from Orin, either. Orin has to support lots of different cars and combinations of technologies, so it's IO controllers are like a Swiss army knife - there is one of everything. There were a few random bits and pieces that Drake has that was reasonable to assume it was cheaper to keep than to pay money to design away. But no, turns out, Nintendo has clever repurposed all of them, so it only has the ones it needs. And in one of the weirdest micro-optimizations, they kicked out the whole USB controller with a new one, because Orin supports 3 USB ports, but Nintendo only needs 2.

Ultimately, "cut down Orin" conveys all the information most of even the biggest tech heads care about, and it's what most of us thought was happening for a long time. And no doubt, there are lots of plumbing in the chip design that they share - a huge portion of chip design is figuring out how the pieces talk to each other as much as it is designing the pieces themselves. But Drake is a different design, and is almost obsessively tuned to Nintendo's needs, down to the tiniest detail.
 
oldpuck said:
The CPU is a slightly different variant, in a different cluster configuration (8 cores in 1 cluster, instead of 3 clusters of 4 core each), with a larger L2 cache.
Click to expand...
Larger L3 cache, not larger L2 cache. Both the Cortex-A78AE and the Cortex-A78C support up to 512 KB of L2 cache.
oldpuck said:
The memory controller includes updates from Lovelace, that make it more power efficient.
Click to expand...
(Keep in mind I could be misunderstanding here.)

Doesn't Ada Lovelace's increased memory power efficiency primarily come from having significantly more L2 cache on the GPU side? Nobody knows with 100% certainty if Drake's GPU has 1 MB or 4 MB of L2 cache. If Drake's GPU has 1 MB of L2 cache, that seems practically on course with how much L2 cache Nvidia typically allocates to Ampere GPUs.
 
chocolate_supra said:
I'm not knowledgeable about all this stuff at all but based on spending a lot of time reading this thread and, like, vibes I guess, I have the expectation that 12 will be the retail model and the 16 we've been hearing about could be coming from devkits having extra.

And if I'm wrong and the 16GB is what retail models are equipped with, then woohoo!
Click to expand...
Very smart assessment. Makes the most sense.
 
0
Goblin_knight said:
Originally i was gonna ask if 12GB was gonna be enough to last the entire gen. but I realize I don't really know what the next big push in video game tech {like the next 10 years) is gonna be so what do you all think it's gonna be? Just more refinement on current RT techniques?
Click to expand...
If you ask what will be main focus of PS6 and Next Xbox then it will be full RT and AI
 
0
Dakhil said:
Larger L3 cache, not larger L2 cache. Both the Cortex-A78AE and the Cortex-A78C support up to 512 KB of L2 cache.
Click to expand...
Yes, thank you!

Dakhil said:
(Keep in mind I could be misunderstanding here.)

Doesn't Ada Lovelace's increased memory power efficiency primarily come from having significantly more L2 cache on the GPU side? Nobody knows with 100% certainty if Drake's GPU has 1 MB or 4 MB of L2 cache. If Drake's GPU has 1 MB of L2 cache, that seems practically on course with how much L2 cache Nvidia typically allocates to Ampere GPUs.
Click to expand...
Nvidia has also mentioned a new clock gating mechanism in their memory controller. And LiC found references to a clock gating mechanism in Drake that was backported from Ada Lovelace. Cache is probably the much bigger win, but also hard to squeeze into a space constrained chip. Going by the very few references to the clock gating tech, it seems to be a DVFS for the memory clock, basically. On a laptop, I imagine that's a decent sized win, on a console, it's probably pretty small*.

That's part of why I think it's interesting to point out. Orin is a low power device, but Nvidia didn't bother downporting this barely-mentioned feature. But Nvidia/Nintendo put in the work to get every little bit of extra performance and power savings they could possibly get.

*It just occurred to me, literally while writing this, that if Switch 2 has BC, then this might be a good power saving win for those older games. Switch has such a small memory bus, that games optimized for it probably would leave Drake's bus idle long enough for DVFS to do some good.
 
carbvan said:
That's not a valid comparison? Phones weren't playing 3D games on the scale of BotW back at the release of the Switch.
Click to expand...
Right, so given the hardware and form factor, one can't really say they were crippling their hardware then, so why think they will now? Not directed at you, but you get it though.

Thing about this 16GB LPDDR5 vs 12GB LPDDR5X is that Nintendo could very well say "hey, we're going full custom with this chip, so let's make the best of it." and they go with 16GB LPDDR5X.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom